If you read the Koran or study the life of Mohammed, it's pretty clear the one thing he really wanted was peace for his people, yet considering the violent strife within the Islamic community and violent strife at almost every border of the Islamic community, peace is something that's eluded Mohammed's followers, almost from the beginning.
Although we, in the west, tend to concentrate on violence between Islam and other cultures, violence within Islam is almost as prevalent. Mohammed himself was threatened by the violence of Arabic tribalism which is why he entered a period of self-imposed exile in Medina. For the lack of peace, he left his home and became a refugee.
I have no idea what it means to receive messages from God, but I do know what it's like to be a man who deeply wants peace and happiness for his people, so it's easy for me to sympathize with Mohammed on that level.
Mohammed created the Constitution of Medina, which was a watershed accomplishment in the very concept of peace among differing people and the traditional greeting among Islamic people is "As-Salamu Alaykum" meaning "peace be upon you". Despite all this, almost from the beginning, Islam has been embroiled in violent confrontation.
You would think peace was possible. Islam is a very disciplined religion, much more so than Christianity and its followers are very devout. If Mohammed wanted peace then there should be peace both within Islam and without, but why isn't there?
Part of the answer may be that, from the beginning, Islam had violence thrust upon them. Mohammed had attained peace in Medina, but soon afterward armed forces from Mecca attacked them. In response, Mohammed left the path of peace and became a man of war.
By unifying the people of Medina and using ideas from outside his own culture (see Salman The Persian), Mohammed was able to repel the attacks from Mecca and force Mecca into a treaty.
That may have been the turning point. To protect his followers, Mohammed made the transition from prophet to general and in the years to come he used his army to conquer not only Mecca, but most the Arabian peninsula.
Instead of maintaining peace in Medina, he became a man of conquest. Elements of a warrior's code found their way not only into the Islamic culture but also into the Koran itself.
I can't posit that Christians are any better than Muslims in this regard. Christians have their own history of violence to deal with that's at least as substantial as Islam's. Jesus may not have been a warrior himself, but his followers certainly took on that mantle.
I would say though, that it's very difficult for a warrior culture to ever find peace, and for one to truly follow Mohammed, it may be necessary to divorce the prophet's desire for peace from his own actions as a military man.
We're trying to come to a point where the people of the world can practice their different faiths without fear that anyone will attack them for it. To do that we have to eliminate all traces of tribalism or primativism or any warrior's code that tries to tell us that the only path to peace and safety is by eliminating anyone who believes or behaves differently from us.
Islam is truly a religion of peace and Christianity is truly a religion of love, but how far are we from either of these in reality? Particularly, we who descend from the faith of Abraham must rededicate ourselves to the real values of our faith beyond the interceding fallacies of tribalism that followed.
Peace? Love? The choice is ours.
The Life Of Boyd Campbell Jackson Mississippi
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Monday, January 5, 2009
The Cruel God
People say the God of the Old Testament is cruel and if you read it, it seems so.
It's really a matter of perspective though. Writers of the Old Testament ascribed everything in life to God, and since life can be cruel God comes off as cruel sometimes too.
If a city like Sodom is destroyed by a volcano, they felt compelled to come up with a reason so they said the people in the city were sinful and that's why God destroyed them.
I don't know if the people in Sodom were any more sinful than people anywhere else, but there have been several cities destroyed by volcanoes through the ages and people of faith want to know why.
It's hard for people to accept that we don't know why cities are destroyed by volcanoes: probably because they are built near a crack in the crust where magma can force its way through to the surface, but that's not a reason to say God is cruel.
The Old Testament, particularly the Torah, covers a vast period of time and these disasters stand out. It doesn't mean God is cruel though. There are other parts where God is shown as kind and merciful, but those parts aren't nearly as memorable as the more painful ones.
What's missing from the Old Testament is the Jesus message that all things work for the good, and even though life is cruel, it's not the end of the story--there is another life that comes after this one where justice and mercy reign.
If that message were clearer in the Torah and the Old Testament, then God would not seem so cruel. That's why it's so important that Jesus came when he did to give us this message of hope.
Children too think their parents are cruel when they don't get their way and it can take many years for them to understand how much their parents really loved them, especially in the dark times.
God is our parent and the bible is the story some of us wrote along the way of our life with God. There are parts of the story we didn't get exactly right because then and even now our perspective is that of a child and like a child we can't always see how much our parent loves us no matter what happens.
God isn't cruel. God loves us. That doesn't mean things will always be pleasant though. It does mean that we will make it through the unpleasant bits, then and now. There is love and there is hope, no matter what happens.
It's really a matter of perspective though. Writers of the Old Testament ascribed everything in life to God, and since life can be cruel God comes off as cruel sometimes too.
If a city like Sodom is destroyed by a volcano, they felt compelled to come up with a reason so they said the people in the city were sinful and that's why God destroyed them.
I don't know if the people in Sodom were any more sinful than people anywhere else, but there have been several cities destroyed by volcanoes through the ages and people of faith want to know why.
It's hard for people to accept that we don't know why cities are destroyed by volcanoes: probably because they are built near a crack in the crust where magma can force its way through to the surface, but that's not a reason to say God is cruel.
The Old Testament, particularly the Torah, covers a vast period of time and these disasters stand out. It doesn't mean God is cruel though. There are other parts where God is shown as kind and merciful, but those parts aren't nearly as memorable as the more painful ones.
What's missing from the Old Testament is the Jesus message that all things work for the good, and even though life is cruel, it's not the end of the story--there is another life that comes after this one where justice and mercy reign.
If that message were clearer in the Torah and the Old Testament, then God would not seem so cruel. That's why it's so important that Jesus came when he did to give us this message of hope.
Children too think their parents are cruel when they don't get their way and it can take many years for them to understand how much their parents really loved them, especially in the dark times.
God is our parent and the bible is the story some of us wrote along the way of our life with God. There are parts of the story we didn't get exactly right because then and even now our perspective is that of a child and like a child we can't always see how much our parent loves us no matter what happens.
God isn't cruel. God loves us. That doesn't mean things will always be pleasant though. It does mean that we will make it through the unpleasant bits, then and now. There is love and there is hope, no matter what happens.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
They Don't Care About My Opinion
We allow ourselves to really care about things we have little or no control over.
Not just "care about" in a generic sense but really deeply love and become devoted to. Organizations are often the most common target of these feelings, anything involving people: schools, churches, political parties, even sports teams, we develop true and deep feelings for them so that their fortunes, good and bad, become a part of our lives.
It can be heart breaking though because, even if we allow ourselves to become really devoted to these things and spend a great deal of time and effort to try and help them, we often have little or no control over what happens to them.
There have been too many times in my life when I felt like something I cared about was headed in the wrong direction or suffering needlessly and I tried to appeal to the people involved to make things better, only to be told that they were very grateful for my concern and even my service, but they're really not going to implement any of my suggestions or change the path they're on.
It's frustrating because there's this thing you really, really, care about and it's headed for a train-wreck or even in a train-wreck and there's nothing you can do, they're on that path and they're going to stay on that path no matter what you say.
It's a lot like having children. You love them and care about them and try to teach them and help them, you may even be willing to give your own life for them, but ultimately they're in charge of their own destiny and there's nothing you can do about it.
There's just such an organization that I love. I'm not going to say who it is (although some of you have probably already guessed) but for the past eight or nine years, I've been really worried that they were headed in the wrong direction and I've really struggled with the people involved to make things better, but it seems like every time I turn my eyes in that direction, things are just getting worse and nobody is willing to listen to me.
I love loving people and I'm really glad God gave me the capacity to love, but that kind of love can be a cruel mistress sometimes.
Sometimes, I wish what I loved was just a sports team because at least then I'd have the comfort of knowing that ultimately it wasn't really all that important, but I've never been lucky that way: the things I love tend to be more substantial than that.
I really don't have an ending for this piece. There's no lesson here. Just that--loving means opening yourself up to suffering because the world is an uncertain place. It's still worth it though, loving is. If anything I would encourage you to love more, even though it makes you all the more vulnerable, but, how I wish there were another way.
Not just "care about" in a generic sense but really deeply love and become devoted to. Organizations are often the most common target of these feelings, anything involving people: schools, churches, political parties, even sports teams, we develop true and deep feelings for them so that their fortunes, good and bad, become a part of our lives.
It can be heart breaking though because, even if we allow ourselves to become really devoted to these things and spend a great deal of time and effort to try and help them, we often have little or no control over what happens to them.
There have been too many times in my life when I felt like something I cared about was headed in the wrong direction or suffering needlessly and I tried to appeal to the people involved to make things better, only to be told that they were very grateful for my concern and even my service, but they're really not going to implement any of my suggestions or change the path they're on.
It's frustrating because there's this thing you really, really, care about and it's headed for a train-wreck or even in a train-wreck and there's nothing you can do, they're on that path and they're going to stay on that path no matter what you say.
It's a lot like having children. You love them and care about them and try to teach them and help them, you may even be willing to give your own life for them, but ultimately they're in charge of their own destiny and there's nothing you can do about it.
There's just such an organization that I love. I'm not going to say who it is (although some of you have probably already guessed) but for the past eight or nine years, I've been really worried that they were headed in the wrong direction and I've really struggled with the people involved to make things better, but it seems like every time I turn my eyes in that direction, things are just getting worse and nobody is willing to listen to me.
I love loving people and I'm really glad God gave me the capacity to love, but that kind of love can be a cruel mistress sometimes.
Sometimes, I wish what I loved was just a sports team because at least then I'd have the comfort of knowing that ultimately it wasn't really all that important, but I've never been lucky that way: the things I love tend to be more substantial than that.
I really don't have an ending for this piece. There's no lesson here. Just that--loving means opening yourself up to suffering because the world is an uncertain place. It's still worth it though, loving is. If anything I would encourage you to love more, even though it makes you all the more vulnerable, but, how I wish there were another way.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Is There a God Delusion?
One of the major tenets of books like The God Delusion and The God Part of the Brain is that we invented God to make ourselves feel better about death and the various insecurities of life.
I don't subscribe to that theory. People use their faith in that way, but, I believe the impetus for our concept for God comes from a very different place: probably from God himself trying to reveal the truth to us or from our own latent ability to see beyond our senses.
Let's suppose for a moment though that it is true; that we invented all this just to make ourselves feel better, to have some comfort and hope faced with the certainty of death and the uncertainty of life.
What kind of cruel person tells people this without offering anything as an alternative?
It's one thing for some over-read, middle class twit like myself luxuriating in the relative ease and security of the west to speculate that God doesn't exist, we at least have the consolation of knowing that we have it fairly well in this life, but most of the world isn't nearly so fortunate.
Most of the world needs some sort of comfort and assurance that their lives have meaning, that they're not just the fodder of evolution and random chance. Even if it is just a delusion, it gives them hope and with hope, even the most unfortunate life becomes bearable and full of potential.
Even though it's controversial, I highly recommend the film The Last Temptation of Christ. The film is the fictional account of Jesus speculating what might happen if he escaped the cross and lived rather than sacrificing himself.
In it, the Jesus that didn't die encounters Paul, preaching about the Jesus that did die. Jesus comes to Paul and says "I am the man you are preaching about", expecting Paul to embrace his new life as an ordinary man, but Paul gets angry. He says that the people he preaches to need the Jesus who died. Jesus says "You can't save the world by lying" and Paul replies:
If a man's search for truth should lead him to the conclusion that there is no God, that's fine, but don't evangelize it, don't shout it, not without something to offer in its stead because it's better for men to live with a delusion but have hope then to know the truth and have none.
Where's the mercy in taking away hope? Where's the love? There isn't any.
People who don't believe have a tendency to consider themselves superior to those who do, because they at least know "the truth".
Maybe that's what they use to fill the void left when they abandon faith. Considering oneself superior in life can go a long way toward replacing the hope they abandon, but that too is only a delusion, because none of us are superior to anyone, no matter what we believe or don't believe.
Science offers us information, not "the truth". Certainly information is innately and uniquely valuable, but it's not God.
One thing that's very clear from the history of science, is that no matter how much information we uncover, there's still more left to be uncovered. Science brings us no closer to complete knowledge now than we were ten thousand years ago.
I'm capable of abandoning my faith. I've done it before. But after very careful consideration, I choose to embrace it now
Maybe I am deluded for believing in God or believing that our lives extend beyond these physical bodies. Maybe I am. But, you know what? I'm satisfied with that.
I'm satisfied with it because I know my limits, and one of my limits is that I need God. I need to know there is more to me and the people I love than just what I perceive.
I don't subscribe to that theory. People use their faith in that way, but, I believe the impetus for our concept for God comes from a very different place: probably from God himself trying to reveal the truth to us or from our own latent ability to see beyond our senses.
Let's suppose for a moment though that it is true; that we invented all this just to make ourselves feel better, to have some comfort and hope faced with the certainty of death and the uncertainty of life.
What kind of cruel person tells people this without offering anything as an alternative?
It's one thing for some over-read, middle class twit like myself luxuriating in the relative ease and security of the west to speculate that God doesn't exist, we at least have the consolation of knowing that we have it fairly well in this life, but most of the world isn't nearly so fortunate.
Most of the world needs some sort of comfort and assurance that their lives have meaning, that they're not just the fodder of evolution and random chance. Even if it is just a delusion, it gives them hope and with hope, even the most unfortunate life becomes bearable and full of potential.
Even though it's controversial, I highly recommend the film The Last Temptation of Christ. The film is the fictional account of Jesus speculating what might happen if he escaped the cross and lived rather than sacrificing himself.
In it, the Jesus that didn't die encounters Paul, preaching about the Jesus that did die. Jesus comes to Paul and says "I am the man you are preaching about", expecting Paul to embrace his new life as an ordinary man, but Paul gets angry. He says that the people he preaches to need the Jesus who died. Jesus says "You can't save the world by lying" and Paul replies:I created the truth out of what people needed and what they believed. If I have to crucify you to save the world, then I'll crucify you. And if I have to resurrect you, then I'll do that, too.Death is inescapable. We all know that. We have all always known that. If the concept of God gives us hope in the face of this unerasable but horrible truth, then it is worthy of us, even if it is a delusion.
...You don't know how much people need God. You don't know how happy he can make them. Happy to do anything. He can make them happy to die and they'll die. All for the sake of Christ. Jesus Christ. Jesus of Nazareth. The Son of God. The Messiah. Not you. Not for your sake. You know, I'm glad I met you. Because now I can forget all about you. My Jesus is much more important and much more powerful.
If a man's search for truth should lead him to the conclusion that there is no God, that's fine, but don't evangelize it, don't shout it, not without something to offer in its stead because it's better for men to live with a delusion but have hope then to know the truth and have none.
Where's the mercy in taking away hope? Where's the love? There isn't any.
People who don't believe have a tendency to consider themselves superior to those who do, because they at least know "the truth".
Maybe that's what they use to fill the void left when they abandon faith. Considering oneself superior in life can go a long way toward replacing the hope they abandon, but that too is only a delusion, because none of us are superior to anyone, no matter what we believe or don't believe.
Science offers us information, not "the truth". Certainly information is innately and uniquely valuable, but it's not God.
One thing that's very clear from the history of science, is that no matter how much information we uncover, there's still more left to be uncovered. Science brings us no closer to complete knowledge now than we were ten thousand years ago.
I'm capable of abandoning my faith. I've done it before. But after very careful consideration, I choose to embrace it now
Maybe I am deluded for believing in God or believing that our lives extend beyond these physical bodies. Maybe I am. But, you know what? I'm satisfied with that.
I'm satisfied with it because I know my limits, and one of my limits is that I need God. I need to know there is more to me and the people I love than just what I perceive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Official Ted Lasso
